<r0ni>
why remove panfrost from mesa? did it break?
<beerman>
r0ni: it depends on libclc
<cruxbridge>
<pitillo (@pitillo:crux.nu)> It’s probably a better approach to overlay mesa in a specific device ports collection which uses panfrost (newer mali devices)… because libclc puts many big deps in the chain….
<r0ni>
i finally got crux to boot on my rpi5 because i'd just realized it wasn't reading the right root device
<r0ni>
total woosh moment
<cruxbridge>
<pitillo (@pitillo:crux.nu)> XD
<cruxbridge>
<pitillo (@pitillo:crux.nu)> Glad it’s fixed with that kind of problem…
<r0ni>
is there a ports collection for rockchip still?
<r0ni>
ahh i see pine64
<r0ni>
I'll have to dust off the pinebook and get it up and running
<cruxbridge>
<pitillo (@pitillo:crux.nu)> Which rockchip model? There are many many variants
crux-arm-bot has joined #crux-arm
<crux-arm-bot>
[ core-arm/3.8 ]: glibc: sync with upstream 2.40 branch
crux-arm-bot has left #crux-arm [#crux-arm]
<r0ni>
rk3388 pinebook pro
<pitillo>
so it shares the same arch as the soc in the pine64 a64 it seems
<r0ni>
yep, with panfrost gpu heh
<pitillo>
LOL
<pitillo>
so probably an overlay for that soc would be needed
<beerman>
So gtk4 will have shit performance?
<pitillo>
no idea really.... but with lima/panfrost drivers, opengl es implementation is supported, not sure if GTK relays on it
<pitillo>
Mali T760 with panfrost supports OpenGL ES
<pitillo>
3.1
<pitillo>
GTK apps are now only GPU-accelerated on devices that supporting OpenGL ES 3.0 or OpenGL 3.3....
<pitillo>
then, shouldn't the pinephone with panfrost support and perform well with gtk 4?
CrashTestDummy has joined #crux-arm
CrashTestDummy has quit [Client Quit]
<r0ni>
tbh last i used gnome on it, it performed bad, but that was before the recent changes. gnome 3.38 ran excellent tho but that was gtk3 based... i'll have to check how gtk4 performs now